World Cup 2026

[Pakuni]

https://x.com/thesammahmood_/status/2074434672201785728?s=12

shout out tarragona/shoothoops

That would have been spot on two or three World Cups ago. I'm not so sure that's the case today.
The large majority of USMNT players didn't go to college, and most of those who did were there for 1-2 years.

There are structural problems in how we develop soccer talent. I just don't think that problem is "too many future pros are focused on college." There's been a pretty notable shift away from that over the last decade.

[The Sultan]

That would have been spot on two or three World Cups ago. I'm not so sure that's the case today.
The large majority of USMNT players didn't go to college, and most of those who did were there for 1-2 years.

There are structural problems in how we develop soccer talent. I just don't think that problem is "too many future pros are focused on college." There's been a pretty notable shift away from that over the last decade.

I don't think that's the point. I think the point is that a model that is set up primarily to get soccer players a college scholarship is not a great model for the development of the USMNT.

[panda]

That would have been spot on two or three World Cups ago. I'm not so sure that's the case today.
The large majority of USMNT players didn't go to college, and most of those who did were there for 1-2 years.

There are structural problems in how we develop soccer talent. I just don't think that problem is "too many future pros are focused on college." There's been a pretty notable shift away from that over the last decade.

7 of the 26 players on the WC roster played college soccer. That's crazy.

A large percentage of high achieving young American players play at a low level of competition compared to their peers who are playing professionally with men. If a higher yield of those players play pro right away, this will increase depth and increase the level of play domestically. It won't happen overnight, but getting rid of the college soccer path and matching what the rest of the world does is absolutely part of the puzzle.

[Pakuni]

7 of the 26 players on the WC roster played college soccer. That's crazy.

Actually 8, but only half of them spent more than two years in college. Two of those four are goalies, and another (Ream) is by far the oldest.
It's not a common development path any more for high-level American players.

A large percentage of high achieving young American players play at a low level of competition compared to their peers who are playing professionally with men. If a higher yield of those players play pro right away, this will increase depth and increase the level of play domestically. It won't happen overnight, but getting rid of the college soccer path and matching what the rest of the world does is absolutely part of the puzzle.

I don't really disagree, but good luck convincing fringe players (or their parents) to abandon opportunities to attend Stanford, UCLA, Harvard or Virginia so they can go play in a European academy where less than 1% of participants make it to the professional ranks. Most are going to find a degree from a top school more appealing than a puncher's chance at 10 years in League Two.

[Pakuni]

I don't think that's the point. I think the point is that a model that is set up primarily to get soccer players a college scholarship is not a great model for the development of the USMNT.

That's true, but ignores the reality that most future USMNT players abandon that model at a young age.
If you want to say that the system does a poor job of early identification of players who should develop outside that model, I agree! But the problem isn't that our best players are spending their key developmental years in college or on a college-focused track. Most of our best players are being yanked off that track in their early teens.

[panda]

That's true, but ignores the reality that most future USMNT players abandon that model at a young age.
If you want to say that the system does a poor job of early identification of players who should develop outside that model, I agree! But the problem isn't that our best players are spending their key developmental years in college or on a college-focused track. Most of our best players are being yanked off that track in their early teens.

Very theoretical - but what happens if our b and c level players start playing professionally right away rather than toiling in college? I think that only improves the depth of the program and may even allow for easier identification of players who may have been missed earlier on.

[JWags85]

Actually 8, but only half of them spent more than two years in college. Two of those four are goalies, and another (Ream) is by far the oldest.
It's not a common development path any more for high-level players.

I don't really disagree, but good luck convincing fringe players (or their parents) to abandon opportunities to attend Stanford, UCLA, Harvard or Virginia so they can go play in an academy where less than 1% of participants make it to the professional ranks.

I actually agree with both of you and the nuance between it is actually part of where the issue is.  The US has gotten better (it was a low bar) and identifying some top players and getting them into the MLS academy to Europe pipeline (sometimes with a MLS stint in their late teens).  But the rest of the system, outside of the top 1% percentage elite players is still focused on that college pipeline.  So what that does is eliminates late bloomers or good but not great players that develop a bit later.

There are a LOT of European players in D1/D2/D3 soccer programs in the US.  Nearly all of them were part of an academy program back in the UK/Europe, washed out as potential pros for their EPL/Championship/League One academy, and pivoted to playing college soccer in the US for the scholarship/education.  Which is backwards from the US where its all driving for D1 soccer and if you're truly otherworldly exceptional, maybe you get plucked out and placed on the academy to pro path.

The US has gotten to a place where it can produce a few top level European league talent guys each year.  The system still needs to develop where it can produce further waves of guys that can push them and so there is depth instead of relying on guys making leaps in their 20s when they finally have gotten good enough to step up a level.

[jesmu84]

https://x.com/thesammahmood_/status/2074434672201785728?s=12

shout out tarragona/shoothoops

We probably spend more money on youth soccer than almost any country in the world, yet the technical output does not match the investment.

Replace "youth soccer" with "healthcare" and there seems to be a theme going on here...

[wadesworld]

After a day to think on it, what a disappointing finish to what was such a fun ride this WC. I agree with Sultan based purely on results this is no different than other runs, but the style of play and home crowds made this special IMO.

Howeva - the game last night was a complete and utter embarrassment. I don't know if we're much better than Belgium but gifting four goals to your opponent doesn't say your opponent is head and shoulders above you. It says you played like garbage.

Dest was horribly wasteful going forward and directly responsible for the first goal. Ream was a statue all game and directly responsible for the second goal. Freese made some good saves but that mistake he made is atrocious and should never happen. Poor Chris Richards had such a good tournament but his mistake gifted Lukaku #4. Belgium didn't win this we lost with horrible mistakes.

Freeman played poorly yesterday but ultimately had a great tournament. Mckennie, Adams, Tillman and Balogun all improved or validated their stock value.

Pulisic...Horrible tournament aside from the first 45 minutes of the Paraguay game. Made of glass, zero impact whatsoever and comes out after the game last night saying his injury will give him time to rest. SMH - Horrible mentality for a player coming off a very poor club season. He'll be back in MLS in a year.

Overall a great ride with great pieces. Onto the Copa with king BJ at the helm :-)

*edit

Real legend calls out Pulisic
https://x.com/sydneyleroux/status/2074539612467298562?s=46

You know more about soccer than me and watch way more than me, but as someone with not much knowledge on the sport or tactics involved, Belgium certainly appeared head and shoulders better than the US last night to me. Of course the US gave away a few goals, but Belgium also created a few opportunities that they didn't convert on, particularly early. The 4-1 score felt about right.

(Admittedly, I did miss the first 10 or so minutes of the second half.)

[pbiflyer]

Maybe AI will save our soccer program.


The winner of every Round of 16 game so far has been the country with the highest unemployment rate for men aged 15-24

https://x.com/f_edits/status/2074559667825516609?s=46&t=wj-kQtLCLPNb9xDTKbHRvQ

[Pakuni]

Maybe AI will save our soccer program.


The winner of every Round of 16 game so far has been the country with the highest unemployment rate for men aged 15-24

https://x.com/f_edits/status/2074559667825516609?s=46&t=wj-kQtLCLPNb9xDTKbHRvQ

Live betting Colombia ...

Update: Curse you, pbiflyer

[Billy Hoyle]

the Swiss win in PKs. I'm neutral on the outcome.

[MuggsyB]

the Swiss win in PKs. I'm neutral on the outcome.

Fondue for everyone!!

[Pakuni]

The plot thickens?

https://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/article/fifa-reportedly-suspended-2-us-soccer-officials-before-usmnts-loss-to-belgium-191147362.html

[JWags85]

You know more about soccer than me and watch way more than me, but as someone with not much knowledge on the sport or tactics involved, Belgium certainly appeared head and shoulders better than the US last night to me. Of course the US gave away a few goals, but Belgium also created a few opportunities that they didn't convert on, particularly early. The 4-1 score felt about right.

(Admittedly, I did miss the first 10 or so minutes of the second half.)

Soccer can be an incredibly fickle game, and one of the inherent parts of it that can be so frustrating for both a casual fan to understand (but also to accept as a more diehard fan) is the nature of the game lends itself to huge potential for variance.  So its surprisingly common to see a match with 2 very even squads on paper where one team outclasses the other.  Last night was one of those.

The hallmark for the US all tournament was coming out from the first whistle aggressive and like a house on fire.  Attacking, pressing, playing confidently on the wings and up the middle.  We saw none of that last night.  I don't know if it was nerves, if it was noise/distraction from everything off the field in the week leading up to it, if it was an attempt at a bit more of a conservative strategy from Poch?  Probably a combination of all 3.

Talking to my Belgian friends, they mentioned that Belgium, as they currently are set up, really struggle against defensive minded teams that look to score on the counter.  The US is more free flowing and attacking which allowed Belgium to get more of a rhythm on offense then they had against Senegal or in the group stages.  That's not to say the US should have abandoned their style to mitigate this, just another element of variance that can make things look more lopsided than it is.

[panda]

You know more about soccer than me and watch way more than me, but as someone with not much knowledge on the sport or tactics involved, Belgium certainly appeared head and shoulders better than the US last night to me. Of course the US gave away a few goals, but Belgium also created a few opportunities that they didn't convert on, particularly early. The 4-1 score felt about right.

(Admittedly, I did miss the first 10 or so minutes of the second half.)

You see it often in knockout/1 off games where one team looks better but the opponent is resolute defending and can nick a goal against the run of play.

If option A isn't working, good teams can always sink back, absorb pressure and wait for their moment.

I still believe the US is capable of doing that but the team had so many uncharacteristic mistakes last night.

Same thing as the ncaa tournament, you don't have to be the better team on the night, but you need to stay in the game to win. Self inflicted mistakes killed us, not the quality of Belgium.

[Jockey]

You see it often in knockout/1 off games where one team looks better but the opponent is resolute defending and can nick a goal against the run of play.

If option A isn't working, good teams can always sink back, absorb pressure and wait for their moment.

I still believe the US is capable of doing that but the team had so many uncharacteristic mistakes last night.

Same thing as the ncaa tournament, you don't have to be the better team on the night, but you need to stay in the game to win. Self inflicted mistakes killed us, not the quality of Belgium.

Belgium is light years ahead of the US. Our entire men's system is broken. It is set up for the rich kids to succeed. If your family doesn't have $25,000 per year for all of the club play, you are basically left outside the system.

The US is a lower tier team. Winning a round of 32 game is their ceiling.

[panda]

Belgium is light years ahead of the US. Our entire men's system is broken. It is set up for the rich kids to succeed. If your family doesn't have $25,000 per year for all of the club play, you are basically left outside the system.

The US is a lower tier team. Winning a round of 32 game is their ceiling.

The clown with yet another clown take. Belgium is marginally, not light years ahead of us.

Belgium finishes in the last 5 world cups
2026 quarters (not beating Spain)
2022 grouped
2018 3rd
2014 quarters
2010 didn't qualify

Belgium finishes last 5 euros
2024 round of 16
2020 quarters
2016 quarters
2012 dnq
2008 dnq

France, Spain and Argentina are light years ahead. Belgium...not

Come correct next time clown

[JWags85]

Belgium is light years ahead of the US. Our entire men's system is broken. It is set up for the rich kids to succeed. If your family doesn't have $25,000 per year for all of the club play, you are basically left outside the system.

The US is a lower tier team. Winning a round of 32 game is their ceiling.

Pay to Play is detrimental to the overall development of soccer because it runs counter to the academy structure which is what is the most successful and proven method of youth development worldwide.

But to distill that to "a system set up for rich kids" is absolutely brain dead and shows you have no clue what you're talking about, as is common for you in all the soccer discussions. 

Outside of Alex Freeman (son of Antonio Freeman) Tim Weah and Gio Reyna (who are all professional athlete kids), not a single young player on the US roster is a "rich kid.  Not Chris Richards, not Tyler Adams, not Pepi or Aaronsen, not Scally, and despite what people pretend or try to ascribe, not Pulisic.  I can assure you Mark Pulisic wasn't making huge bank playing/managing indoor soccer.

Does the P2P system, as opposed to the academy system, make it difficult for very low income kids to play club?  Sure.  But that doesn't make it a "rich kid" sport, that's dumb hot take reductionist nonsense.  There are millions of lower middle/middle class kids playing club soccer.  It doesn't cost $25K a year to play club, no clue where you are pulling that number out of your ass from.

The US system needs to be better if the US wants to be an elite national team (and maybe it doesn't).  But parroting exaggerated nonsense to push an agenda is a great way to dead a conversation.

[Jockey]

Rather than frame it in terms of rich kids, I should have said that our current system eliminates most poor kids.

My daughter has another friends whose daughter was good enough to participate in Olympic trials for US team and spent a couple years playing overseas. If you don't think that it is a very expensive process to get to that point, there is nothing more I can say.

[Jockey]

The clown with yet another clown take. Belgium is marginally, not light years ahead of us.

Belgium finishes in the last 5 world cups
2026 quarters (not beating Spain)
2022 grouped
2018 3rd
2014 quarters
2010 didn't qualify

Belgium finishes last 5 euros
2024 round of 16
2020 quarters
2016 quarters
2012 dnq
2008 dnq

France, Spain and Argentina are light years ahead. Belgium...not

Come correct next time clown

OK. So we got destroyed by a marginal team. That makes your argument even more ridiculous.

[Jockey]

BTW, we did beat Belgium 96 years ago, so I guess we always have a "chance".

[BM1090]

Belgium is light years ahead of the US. Our entire men's system is broken. It is set up for the rich kids to succeed. If your family doesn't have $25,000 per year for all of the club play, you are basically left outside the system.

The US is a lower tier team. Winning a round of 32 game is their ceiling.

Completely disagree. Belgium didn't do much impressive, we just folded.

Spain, France..those teams are light years ahead of the US. Belgium isn't, the US just choked.

You're right about the men's system being broken though

[Pakuni]

Rather than frame it in terms of rich kids, I should have said that our current system eliminates most poor kids.

My daughter has another friends whose daughter was good enough to participate in Olympic trials for US team and spent a couple years playing overseas. If you don't think that it is a very expensive process to get to that point, there is nothing more I can say.

You're not wrong, but it's hardly exclusive to soccer.
Travel soccer costs are a pittance compared to hockey, and they're no worse than the costs of high-level youth volleyball, football, baseball, golf, swimming, tennis, etc. Even basketball is expensive, unless you're good enough for a program that gets shoe money.
Pay-for-play absolutely is part of the problem, but it's not THE problem.

[panda]

OK. So we got destroyed by a marginal team. That makes your argument even more ridiculous.

No clown - we self imploded against a team who is not light years ahead of us.